Lake Wakatip Mail. QUEENSTOWN, WEDNESDAY, OCT. 15, 1873.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 779, 15 October 1873, Page 2

Lake Wakatip Mail. QUEENSTOWN, WEDNESDAY, OCT. 15, 1873.

In our article last week on the sale of the Wakatip run, or proposed leasing of them, we entered into the subject pretty fully, contending that the alienation of them would tend to create and perpetuate a number of of evils and further assist in driving away population. Upon a more careful and judicious weighing of the facts than we necessarily gave at the first blush of the case, we arrive at even stronger conclusions. Mr Beetham, R.M., is reported to have said, " I will take care that this piece of country is reserved for cattle or not;" "I will do this and that." We admit, and grant that Mr Beetham may be a most excellent, mild, equitable magistrate, and quite capable of ruling justly the interests of the district in this direction. The matter under notice is unfortunately, however, capable of personal favoritismandabuse by others. To accept these powers would be the renouncing by the people of that which, as we have already pointed out, they are entitled to—local self-management in the same manner as the existent Boards of Wardens for commonages throughout the Southern Island, or as Municipal Councils manage their reserves. It is against this tendency to autocratic rule that the people are objecting so strongly by petition in the first place. It is a recognised fact that in sudden and inexplicable movements or actions in any matter of consequence, a secret history underlies them. When the Provincial Council meets that concerning these runs will be made known. We shall know why the people were called together to cast their votes into the electoral urn, and why immediately thereafter that Board of Wardens they elected was arbitrarily abolished; we shall also then know why those threatening notices about payment of assessments came to be so suddenly issued and so rapidly withdrawn. It will be seen by these few above remarks that we yield not a jot of the position we have taken up, and we are glad to say that, with the exception of a few sheepowners and speculators, the mass of the community is with us on this question. But apart altogether from this statement of the case, we promised in our last issue to review what was styled a " feasible suggestion" of solving the difficulty. The suggestion made was that of selling the runs in email blocks of from one thousand to two thousand acres. At first sight the proposed plan presented several advantages, but the demerits upon examination overbalance these. Amongst the advantages pointed out was the acquiring of a class of permanent residents who, by purchase, would be fixed to the soil, and who would make sheep and cattle farming a more systematic calling and pursuit than at present is the case. It was also suggested by the proposer of the scheme that such settlement might tend to promote the encouragement of native industries. There can be no doubt but that the Government would only be too willing to sell the runs and be done with them. For the purpose of revenue they have alienated large blocks of land elsewhere and much of it that is auriferous. They woidd would not hesitate to alienate by sale these depasturing blocks if the law permitted. It must, however, be borne in mind that these runs are all more or less auriferous, and that at once would destroy the value of permanent settlement by locking up an important product to the Colony. As yet we have no effective Mining upon Private Property Act Until we have, no alienation of areas in the manner indicated is desirable. The leasing of lands under the agricultural clauses of the goldfields has been in many cases productive of much evil to miners. It would be far worse if the land was sold in fee simple. Another part of the suggestion made to us, but afterwards, was that of price—viz., sell these blocks from 5s to 10s per acre. This could not, under any circumstances, be done at present as the law stands. Apart from that, the original suggestion could not be carried out unless upon and under some such reduction. In thus examining these suggestions we have given them attention upon two grounds: first, in an honest desire to encourage permanent settlement, the spread of industrial pursuits and advantages flowing therefrom. The other, from a desire to ascertain whether it could be practically adapted and carried out. We repeat that we think it would be unadvisable to adopt them, and we also repeat that we deem the Government to have made a great mistake in abolishing a Board of Wardens so carefully selected, and who evidently intended to do justice to the varied interests that joined together in electing them.